Many (most?) people that carry give some thought to when they would escalate from just having the weapon to preparing to use it, to actually using it. And just exchanging angry words wouldn’t be enough to even start preparing to use it.

AR-15 to M-16 conversions are not easy. A competent machinist could do it if they were willing to risk their tools and freedom. A home hobbiest might be able to do it if they had a good milling machine, but again the risk to freedom makes it unlikely. Could some crazy militia decide to do wholesale modification to their member’s weapons? Sure it could be done. Is BATF and other Law Enforcement looking for this? Absolutely.

Fully auto weapons aren’t that useful anyway. Hard to aim, need to change magazines frequently, allow barrels to cool – all of these are problems. There’s a good reason for the basic military issue M4 carbine not having full-auto capacity.

Definitely agree with the safety tips but that doesn’t mean that I think that anyone but a cop needs to carry a gun in a public meeting. Putting two angry guys at each other when both are armed is a risk without a reward.

How’s this for a suggestion: henceforth, all proponents of health care reform, or anything else that those from beyond the Palin oppose, should bring a SUBSTANTIAL sex-toy to any rally/town-hall they attend. If you can find one big enough, put a rifle-sling on it. And paint it day-glo pink, preferably metallic.

Spread the word.

Quit perpetuating the myth that it is easy to convert a semi-auto sear to fully auto. it isn’t that easy and it is very illegal under GCA 1968. BATF investigates credible claims of illegal conversion and people have died during enforcement operations. Full auto conversions are not widespread, and I’d venture the few illegal fully automatic weapons out there are primarily diverted from military or police, not converted from semi-auto.

I agree with you that fully auto is over rated.

Guns are as safe as the person carrying them. Basic safety rules – treat every firearm as loaded, keep finger away from trigger until ready to shoot, do not point gun at anything you aren’t willing to shoot.

An assault rifle has, among other things, a selective fire setting that includes single shot and automatic fire capability.

If it does not have that capability it is not an assault rifle. And the AR-15 does not have that capability.

Therefore when you label a winger as carrying an assault rifle you are accusing them of breaking the law when you have no evidence that they are, in fact, breaking the law… which plays into their hands.

Guns should never be considered safe simply because they can’t spray bullets by holding down the trigger.

The big question though would be whether any of the intrepid gun toters upgraded to full-auto. The AR-15 converts to a dandy M16 and an UZI semi-auto might be a bit easier still. Of course if you bring a couple of clips then converting the semi-auto with the intent to just rip through the entire clip, via a bit of filing might be an easier way to meet your goal.

Guns and frank discussions on controversial subjects, two things that just naturally go together.

@Zapkitty an assault rifle is not defined by whether it is full-auto but by it’s design features and intended function. An assault rifle has features that are conducive to urban and jungle warfare in contrast to, say, a wooden stock hunting rifle. Light weight, folding stocks and quick breakdown are useful attributes of an assault rifle. An assault rifle is not necessarily a full-auto, machine-gun.